Total
55 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-34765 | 1 Electron | 1 Electron | 2026-04-08 | 6 Medium |
| Electron is a framework for writing cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS. Prior to 39.8.5, 40.8.5, 41.1.0, and 42.0.0-alpha.5, when a renderer calls window.open() with a target name, Electron did not correctly scope the named-window lookup to the opener's browsing context group. A renderer could navigate an existing child window that was opened by a different, unrelated renderer if both used the same target name. If that existing child was created with more permissive webPreferences (via setWindowOpenHandler's overrideBrowserWindowOptions), content loaded by the second renderer inherits those permissions. Apps are only affected if they open multiple top-level windows with differing trust levels and use setWindowOpenHandler to grant child windows elevated webPreferences such as a privileged preload script. Apps that do not elevate child window privileges, or that use a single top-level window, are not affected. Apps that additionally grant nodeIntegration: true or sandbox: false to child windows (contrary to the security recommendations) may be exposed to arbitrary code execution. This vulnerability is fixed in 39.8.5, 40.8.5, 41.1.0, and 42.0.0-alpha.5. | ||||
| CVE-2026-5600 | 1 Pretix | 1 Pretix | 2026-04-08 | N/A |
| A new API endpoint introduced in pretix 2025 that is supposed to return all check-in events of a specific event in fact returns all check-in events belonging to the respective organizer. This allows an API consumer to access information for all other events under the same organizer, even those they should not have access to. These records contain information on the time and result of every ticket scan as well as the ID of the matched ticket. Example: { "id": 123, "successful": true, "error_reason": null, "error_explanation": null, "position": 321, "datetime": "2020-08-23T09:00:00+02:00", "list": 456, "created": "2020-08-23T09:00:00+02:00", "auto_checked_in": false, "gate": null, "device": 1, "device_id": 1, "type": "entry" } An unauthorized user usually has no way to match these IDs (position) back to individual people. | ||||
| CVE-2026-34775 | 1 Electron | 1 Electron | 2026-04-08 | 6.8 Medium |
| Electron is a framework for writing cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS. Prior to versions 38.8.6, 39.8.4, 40.8.4, and 41.0.0, the nodeIntegrationInWorker webPreference was not correctly scoped in all configurations. In certain process-sharing scenarios, workers spawned in frames configured with nodeIntegrationInWorker: false could still receive Node.js integration. Apps are only affected if they enable nodeIntegrationInWorker. Apps that do not use nodeIntegrationInWorker are not affected. This issue has been patched in versions 38.8.6, 39.8.4, 40.8.4, and 41.0.0. | ||||
| CVE-2026-4325 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak | 2026-04-07 | 5.3 Medium |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. The SingleUseObjectProvider, a global key-value store, lacks proper type and namespace isolation. This vulnerability allows an attacker to delete arbitrary single-use entries, which can enable the replay of consumed action tokens, such as password reset links. This could lead to unauthorized access or account compromise. | ||||
| CVE-2026-4282 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak | 2026-04-07 | 7.4 High |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. The SingleUseObjectProvider, a global key-value store, lacks proper type and namespace isolation. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge authorization codes. Successful exploitation can lead to the creation of admin-capable access tokens, resulting in privilege escalation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-5599 | 2026-04-06 | N/A | ||
| A user with API access and "manage users" permission in any venueless world is able to trigger deletion of user accounts in other worlds. | ||||
| CVE-2025-12805 | 1 Redhat | 1 Openshift Ai | 2026-03-31 | 8.1 High |
| A flaw was found in Red Hat OpenShift AI (RHOAI) llama-stack-operator. This vulnerability allows unauthorized access to Llama Stack services deployed in other namespaces via direct network requests, because no NetworkPolicy restricts access to the llama-stack service endpoint. As a result, a user in one namespace can access another user’s Llama Stack instance and potentially view or manipulate sensitive data. | ||||
| CVE-2026-4692 | 1 Mozilla | 3 Firefox, Firefox Esr, Thunderbird | 2026-03-27 | 9.6 Critical |
| Sandbox escape in the Responsive Design Mode component. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 149, Firefox ESR < 115.34, Firefox ESR < 140.9, Thunderbird < 149, and Thunderbird < 140.9. | ||||
| CVE-2026-0542 | 1 Servicenow | 1 Servicenow Ai Platform | 2026-02-27 | N/A |
| ServiceNow has addressed a remote code execution vulnerability that was identified in the ServiceNow AI platform. This vulnerability could enable an unauthenticated user, in certain circumstances, to execute code within the ServiceNow Sandbox. ServiceNow addressed this vulnerability by deploying a security update to hosted instances. Relevant security updates also have been provided to ServiceNow self-hosted customers and partners. Further, the vulnerability is addressed in the listed patches and hot fixes. While we are not currently aware of exploitation against customer instances, we recommend customers promptly apply appropriate updates or upgrade if they have not already done so. | ||||
| CVE-2025-21590 | 1 Juniper | 1 Junos | 2026-02-26 | 4.4 Medium |
| An Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization vulnerability in the kernel of Juniper Networks Junos OS allows a local attacker with high privileges to compromise the integrity of the device. A local attacker with access to the shell is able to inject arbitrary code which can compromise an affected device. This issue is not exploitable from the Junos CLI. This issue affects Junos OS: * All versions before 21.2R3-S9, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R3-S10, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S6, * 22.4 versions before 22.4R3-S6, * 23.2 versions before 23.2R2-S3, * 23.4 versions before 23.4R2-S4, * 24.2 versions before 24.2R1-S2, 24.2R2. | ||||
| CVE-2025-1974 | 1 Kubernetes | 1 Ingress-nginx | 2026-02-26 | 9.8 Critical |
| A security issue was discovered in Kubernetes where under certain conditions, an unauthenticated attacker with access to the pod network can achieve arbitrary code execution in the context of the ingress-nginx controller. This can lead to disclosure of Secrets accessible to the controller. (Note that in the default installation, the controller can access all Secrets cluster-wide.) | ||||
| CVE-2025-20109 | 1 Intel | 1 Processors | 2026-02-26 | 7.8 High |
| Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization in the stream cache mechanism for some Intel(R) Processors may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access. | ||||
| CVE-2025-3086 | 1 M-files | 1 M-files Server | 2026-02-23 | 7.1 High |
| Improper isolation of users in M-Files Server version before 25.3.14549 allows anonymous user to affect other anonymous users views and possibly cause a denial of service | ||||
| CVE-2025-24986 | 1 Microsoft | 2 Azure Promptflow Core, Azure Promptflow Tools | 2026-02-13 | 6.5 Medium |
| Improper isolation or compartmentalization in Azure PromptFlow allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network. | ||||
| CVE-2026-25905 | 1 Mcp-run-python | 1 Mcp-run-python | 2026-02-10 | 5.8 Medium |
| The Python code being run by 'runPython' or 'runPythonAsync' is not isolated from the rest of the JS code, allowing any Python code to use the Pyodide APIs to modify the JS environment. This may result in an attacker hijacking the MCP server - for malicious purposes including MCP tool shadowing. Note - the "mcp-run-python" project is archived and unlikely to receive a fix. | ||||
| CVE-2025-14840 | 2 Bmeme, Drupal | 2 Http Client Manager, Http Client Manager | 2026-02-06 | 7.5 High |
| Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions vulnerability in Drupal HTTP Client Manager allows Forceful Browsing.This issue affects HTTP Client Manager: from 0.0.0 before 9.3.13, from 10.0.0 before 10.0.2, from 11.0.0 before 11.0.1. | ||||
| CVE-2024-35281 | 1 Fortinet | 2 Forticlient, Fortifone Softclient | 2026-02-05 | 2.3 Low |
| An improper isolation or compartmentalization vulnerability [CWE-653] in FortiClientMac version 7.4.2 and below, version 7.2.8 and below, 7.0 all versions and FortiVoiceUCDesktop 3.0 all versions desktop application may allow an authenticated attacker to inject code via Electron environment variables. | ||||
| CVE-2024-30388 | 2 Juniper, Juniper Networks | 17 Ex4100, Ex4100-f, Ex4100-h and 14 more | 2026-01-23 | 6.5 Medium |
| An Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization vulnerability in the Packet Forwarding Engine (pfe) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on QFX5000 Series and EX Series allows an unauthenticated, adjacent attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS). If a specific malformed LACP packet is received by a QFX5000 Series, or an EX4400, EX4100 or EX4650 Series device, an LACP flap will occur resulting in traffic loss. This issue affects Junos OS on QFX5000 Series, and on EX4400, EX4100 or EX4650 Series: * 20.4 versions from 20.4R3-S4 before 20.4R3-S8, * 21.2 versions from 21.2R3-S2 before 21.2R3-S6, * 21.4 versions from 21.4R2 before 21.4R3-S4, * 22.1 versions from 22.1R2 before 22.1R3-S3, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S1, * 22.3 versions before 22.3R2-S2, 22.3R3, * 22.4 versions before 22.4R2-S1, 22.4R3. | ||||
| CVE-2025-46215 | 1 Fortinet | 1 Fortisandbox | 2026-01-14 | 5 Medium |
| An Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization vulnerability [CWE-653] in Fortinet FortiSandbox 5.0.0 through 5.0.1, FortiSandbox 4.4.0 through 4.4.7, FortiSandbox 4.2 all versions, FortiSandbox 4.0 all versions may allow an unauthenticated attacker to evade the sandboxing scan via a crafted file. | ||||
| CVE-2025-53710 | 1 Palantir | 2 Foundry, Foundry Container Service | 2025-12-19 | 7.5 High |
| Due to a product misconfiguration in certain deployment types, it was possible from different pods in the same namespace to communicate with each other. This issue resulted in bypass of access control due to the presence of a vulnerable endpoint in Foundry Container Service that executed user-controlled commands locally. | ||||